steel VS nomicon

I absolutely don't mind the plugin system being a Scheme. It's a plugin for a text editor, and Steel(https://github.com/mattwparas/steel) seems to be a lot less of a maintenance burden than WASM plugins(besides that I find the WASM tooling to be extremely complex).

But besides all that, Helix learned be that I don't need fancy plugins or endless finicking with config files and toolchains. Using a combination of other tools, like yazi and lazygit, helps me not only inside my editor but outside of it as well. And Kakoune does this even better. In that regard it has been a real eye-opener and refreshing. The downside is, it's hard to go back to other editors!

Basically the differences are in the concepts you'll use to write code. Lisps themselves are very different from each other, but just like the languages you're used to, lisps have standard libraries that can be called, and those building blocks can be used to build applications or whatever else. In this case specifically, Steel provides the facility to call Rust functions within a Steel program: https://github.com/mattwparas/steel.

So, although I haven't used Steel, it looks like the advantage you'd get from using it is the opportunity to take advantage of features it provides like transducers and contracts, which are feature common to other Lisps as well.

So, just like choosing any other language, it boils down to a series of tradeoffs.

I've been adding my language steel as the plugin language for helix. There is a lot of discussion around what the plugin system will look like for helix and I figured I'd give it a shot since steel was designed originally for embedding. So far its working pretty well, it turns helix into emacs (without the nearly 50 years of development, so not quite as good). I'm reasonably confident the changes won't be accepted upstream (my language is a scheme but I am the only developer at the moment), but even if not it is a really fun experiment. Hoping that it can be used as a basis for whatever plugin system they eventually land on. An example of what configuration would look like:

Working on automatic doc generation for steel. I've been procrastinating building this out for a while - some of the easy cases are really easy, while the hard cases are definitely not easy.

I'm working on steel, an embedded scheme like programming language. I have lofty goals of eventually adding a JIT and making it viable as a standalone language, but for now its just about as fast as python, and makes for fairly pleasant embedded scripting. Recently added modules and dylibs, and am working on getting documentation into a better place so that adding more libraries becomes easier. I've written a functioning slack bot in it, which is pretty fun, eventually want to make a discord bot as well out of it just to stress test it a bit

it’s even written by the same person that wrote the Nomicon (the guide to the dark arts of unsafe)

If you want to dive deeper you can always have other options but now there are concrete cases, if you want to do low level thing https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/ while if you want multi thread/concurrency stuff https://marabos.nl/atomics/ . There are many many books so you will have to point yourself to what you want

Nonononono. SeqCst is the most error prone memory order: https://github.com/rust-lang/nomicon/issues/166

Hope this helps. For more details, see the Rustonomicon. I referenced the subtyping chapter here extensively.

Nice video! Glad I could help out. This stuff is hard, and I'm still learning a lot about it myself even years later. The Rustonomicon is a great read if you haven't already.

Have you got a moment to read through the good book , after reading through this perhaps try the Rustonomicon.

That is not what UB means. Undefined Behaviour is behaviour that the compiler is allowed to assume will never happen, and which can consequently cause miscompilations due to optimisation passes gone wrong if it does in fact occur in the source code.

It's true that Rust does not have a written specification that clearly delineates what is and isn't UB in a single place. But:

1. UB is impossible in safe code (modulo bugs in unsafe code)

2. There are resources such as the Rustinomicon (https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/) that provide a detailed guide on what is and isn't allowed in unsafe code.

In practice, it's much easier to avoid UB in Rust than it is in C++.

However, this is a wide topic out of scope for a Reddit comment, so maybe just read the Rustonomicon. It explains everything about data handling in Rust.

The ownership model & borrow checker makes rust a bit of an awkward language in which to write complex data structures like trees and graphs. It can be done - since you can always use raw pointers & unsafe code when you absolutely need to to treat rust like C. But the language fights you, and the community can get a bit moralistic about this sort of thing. The rust nomicon is a fantastic resource for learning the limits of the borrow checker, and where and how to use unsafe code correctly. You will need unsafe less than you think you will, but sometimes you will have no choice.